During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

Affirmative Defenses

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

District Court (N.C.) Applies AAPC Retroactively in TCPA Case

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Hogans v. Charter Communs., Inc., No. 5:20-CV-566-D, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182992, at *22-27 (E.D.N.C. Sep. 24, 2021), Judge Dever applied AAPC retroactively, and examined the various options for applying AAPC. In AAPC, a majority of the Court left unanswered the question of retrospective liability under section 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) for the time period in which it was unconstitutional. Three possible… Read More

6th Cir. Says TCPA Still Enforceable Despite Period of Unconstitutionality

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Lindenbaum v. Realgy, Ltd. Liab. Co., No. 20-4252, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 27159, at *2-4 (6th Cir. Sep. 9, 2021), the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found that the District Court erred in dismissing a TCPA claim based on the period of unconstitutionality found in Barr. In 1991, Congress prohibited almost all robocalls to cell phones and landlines.… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Denies Motion to Strike TCPA Class Allegations after Barr v. AAPC

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Buell v. Credit.com, No. 4:21-cv-01055-KAW, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142763, at *1 (N.D. Cal. July 30, 2021), Judge Westmore refused to strike TCPA class allegations following Barr v. APAC.  On April 19, 2021, Defendant Credit.com, Inc. filed a motion to strike Plaintiff Angela Buell's class allegations on the grounds that the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Barr… Read More

District Court (W.V.) Says TCPA Withstands Constitutional Challenge Despite Barr

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Mey v. Medguard Alert, No. 5:19-CV-315, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80083, at *13-14 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 27, 2021), Judge Tates found that the SCOTUS' holding in Barr didn't render the TCPA unconstitutional for non-government backed debts. Those courts which have found the TCPA to be valid with regard to non-Government debt calls, even in light of Barr,include McCurley, supra; Less v. Quest… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Declines to Allow a Good Faith Defense under the TCPA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Berman v. Freedom Fin. Network, No. 18-cv-01060-YGR, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150810, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Sep. 4, 2019), Judge Gonzalez-Rogers found no good faith defense to a TCPA claim. The alleged facts were as follows: In the instant action, plaintiff Daniel Berman, on behalf of himself and a putative class, alleges violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act… Read More

District Court (Wash.) Finds that Federal TCPA Claim Should Have Been Filed as Compulsory Counter-claim in State Court Collection Action; Says that Debt Collection Attorney Had a Permissible Purpose to Access Debtor’s Consumer Report Even for Litigation

by Alisa A. Givental |

In Gilchrist v. First National Bank of Omaha, 2018 WL 317267, at *2–3 (W.D.Wash., 2018), Judge Pechman dismissed a federal TCPA claim because it was compulsory to a debt collection action filed in the state court. There is no question in the Court's mind that there is a logical relationship between (1) the credit agreement between the Bank and Plaintiff, (2)… Read More

District Court (Mich.) Applies 4-year SofL to TCPA Claim to Bar Recovery for Some Calls; Remaining Calls Were Actionable Due to Oral Revocation

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Gold v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 2017 WL 6342575, at *2 (E.D.Mich., 2017), Judge Murphy granted in part and denied in part a TCPA defendant's motion to dismiss. Plaintiff's TCPA claims regarding phone calls made prior to May 10, 2013 are time barred. TCPA claims are subject to a four-year statute of limitations. See 28 U.S.C. § 1658(a); see… Read More

District Court (Mo.) Says that TCPA’s Damages Provision Has Constitutional Limitations

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Golan v. Veritas Entertainment, LLC, 2017 WL 3923162, No. 4:14CV00069 ERW (E.D. Mo. September 7, 2017), Judge Webber found, after a trial on the merits, that the TCPA’s damages provision has constitutional due process limitations and, therefore, reduced the statutory damages to be awarded to $10 per call. The violations in this case involved the use of automated telephone equipment… Read More

Necessity Makes Strange Bedfellows: District Court (Minn.) Finds TCPA Claim Against Labor Union’s Robo Calls Survives Constitutional Challenge; Fed. Gov’t Intervenes in Support of TCPA Plaintiff and Constitutionality of TCPA

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Greenley v. Laborers' International Union of North America, Defendant, and United States of America, Intervenor., 2017 WL 4180159, at *1 (D.Minn., 2017), Judge Wright found that a TCPA claim brought against a Union survived a Motion to Dismiss and constitutional challenge.  The facts were as follows: Greenley's amended complaint alleges that during a sixteen-month period from November 14, 2014, through March… Read More

1 2 3 4